Where were they when Bin Laden killed muslims, you know what religion were the folks at the Northern allance?

Where was the writer?

Well, that makes it OK then. 'Cos they do it, we can do it, if a bit less.

No, from the land of the free and formerly a bastion of human rights - not acceptable.

It depends, US actions in Iraq saved lives. Certainly stopped the Kurds from being slaughtered off by Saddam.

As for for other US actions - just tell the Bathists, the followers of Khomeni and the followers of Bin Laden and the similar types to give up their war. If they dont' well then the US has got to defend itself.

The protestors are phonies , just like the writer of the article is a phony. fake.

No, Joo, it does not depend. If we in the west are "for" human rights and proper treatment of people and peoples, we should not descend to the depths of others. In so doing, we lose the moral high ground. Once that is lost in foreign lands, how soon do you think it could start to be lost at home.

And the issue of the US (again, only the US?) saving lives is moot.

And if that were the criterion, what is the reason for non-intervention in any of the many rogue states?

No, Joo, it does not depend. If we in the west are "for" human rights and proper treatment of people and peoples, we should not descend to the depths of others. In so doing, we lose the moral high ground. Once that is lost in foreign lands, how soon do you think it could start to be lost at home.

I agree with that

Quote:

And the issue of the US (again, only the US?) saving lives is moot.

Not only the US. Kuwaits , Kurds and Israelis.

Quote:

And if that were the criterion, what is the reason for non-intervention in any of the many rogue states?

Joined: 15 May 2004Location: Going in ever decreasing circles until I eventually disappear up my own fundament - in NZ

Posted: Sun May 29, 2005 8:06 pm Post subject:

Gwangjuboy wrote:

Are you suggesting that Western societies can be completely free from people who will commit crime?

The governments, certainly, at least not doing exactly the same things they are criticising other countries for doing. One is much more likely to have the moral high ground if one adopts (and adheres to) a policy of "do as I do", not "do as I say, not as I do" Pot, kettle and black spring to mind.

Are you suggesting that Western societies can be completely free from people who will commit crime?

The governments, certainly, at least not doing exactly the same things they are criticising other countries for doing. One is much more likely to have the moral high ground if one adopts (and adheres to) a policy of "do as I do", not "do as I say, not as I do" Pot, kettle and black spring to mind.

It might help your argument if you refer to what you think the Western governments have done wrong specifically.

No, Joo, it does not depend. If we in the west are "for" human rights and proper treatment of people and peoples, we should not descend to the depths of others.

Are you suggesting that Western societies can be completely free from people who will commit crime? It's a nice qualifier;we must live in utopia before we can criticise butchers.

I neither said, nor implied nor even gave the merest hint that crime can be eradicated. But once a crime has been committed, and the guilty party tried and convicted, he should still be treated in accordance with the basic norms of a civilised and democratic society.

In simple terms: if, for example, the others kill prisoners it does not make it OK for us to nearly kill them.

It might help your argument if you refer to what you think the Western governments have done wrong specifically.

Widespread torture by American military personnel has been demonstrated over and over by many reliable sources including FBI agents, the ICRC, and military investigators. If you haven't noticed any of that it's because you'd rather keep your head buried in the sand or in some other dark place rather than face the truth of the sadistic torture and murder committed by American military personnel.

The report reveals that Dilawar, a taxi driver, died despite the fact that most of the interrogators were convinced he was innocent.

He screamed out, 'Allah! Allah! Allah!' and my first reaction was that he was crying out to his God," Spc Jones said. "Everybody heard him cry out and thought it was funny." The report says it became a running joke and prison guards kicked Dilawar just to hear him scream "Allah". "It went on over a 24-hour period, and I would think that it was over 100 strikes," he said.

During an interrogation, the severely injured Dilawar begged a translator to get him a doctor. The translator says he told the interrogators, but one replied: "He's OK. He's just trying to get out of his restraints."

An autopsy found that Dilawar died of heart failure caused by "blunt force injuries to the lower extremities". The coroner, Lieutenant-Colonel Elizabeth Rouse, told a pre-trial hearing that his legs "had basically been pulpified ... I've seen similar injuries in an individual run over by a bus."

R.S. has a point here. While the Koran story may be a disaster, something far worse than desecrating this book is going on. In Afghanistan, it was found that Americans took an innocent taxi driver and tortured him for no real reason except that he came to close to the base. These people are bored, and they are not interrogating. They are torturing. How widespread is this behavior? I'm sure R.S. and I would disagree on this, but I would say that no matter how widespread the behavior, or how far it goes up, we shouldn't allow the military to have better safeguards. No, the military has proven itself unable to guard the guardians. Instead, the FBI should have regular access and inspections of military detainment centers (even the hidden ones). Even a few incidents are far too many.

Not only do these incidents lend a few ounces of credence to the braying and hemhawing on the far Left, but more importantly, the more widespread behavior this becomes, the more it will pollute the integrity of our armed forces, and the more it will damage their souls.

Joined: 15 May 2004Location: Going in ever decreasing circles until I eventually disappear up my own fundament - in NZ

Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 8:47 am Post subject:

Gwangjuboy wrote:

Sleepy in Seoul wrote:

Gwangjuboy wrote:

Are you suggesting that Western societies can be completely free from people who will commit crime?

The governments, certainly, at least not doing exactly the same things they are criticising other countries for doing. One is much more likely to have the moral high ground if one adopts (and adheres to) a policy of "do as I do", not "do as I say, not as I do" Pot, kettle and black spring to mind.

It might help your argument if you refer to what you think the Western governments have done wrong specifically.

As you can probably imagine, I was thinking of one Western government in particular... and, as an example, here is an excerpt from the U.S. State Department homepage (bold font mine):

Quote:

The protection of fundamental human rights was a foundation stone in the establishment of the United States over 200 years ago. Since then, a central goal of U.S. foreign policy has been the promotion of respect for human rights, as embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The United States understands that the existence of human rights helps secure the peace, deter aggression, promote the rule of law, combat crime and corruption, strengthen democracies, and prevent humanitarian crises.

Because the promotion of human rights is an important national interest, the United States seeks to:

Hold governments accountable to their obligations under universal human rights norms and international human rights instruments;
Promote greater respect for human rights, including freedom from torture, freedom of expression, press freedom, women's rights, children's rights, and the protection of minorities;
Promote the rule of law, seek accountability, and change cultures of impunity;

The U.S. government has shown a pitiful lack of respect for human rights (at least anyone who is not American) - including torturing prisoners and subjecting countless others to harmful or degrading treatment, all in violation of Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Quote:

Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Deliberately breaking the 5th Article, while declaring that they are upholding that self-same Universal Declaration is so breathtakingly arrogant... and yet what else have we come to expect from this administration except lies, mistruths, obfuscation and denial of the truth.

The U.S. government (as shown above) states that it will hold governments accountable to their obligations (but not itself, of course) and seek accountability. What a joke. A classic example of "do as I say, not as I do".

And the U.S. State Department still has the gall to have this posted on its website after everything that has happened. The U.S. government is acting in violation of everything it is pretending to uphold, and seems to expect the world to still view them as a "defender of freedom and human rights".

Torture is neither widespread nor done exculsively by US military personel. There are accounts that security contractors are involved. Thats a factual error on your behalf. Torture also isn't "widespread". Sometimes the torture is a lap dance or a bloody Kotex taunt. Sometimes the interrogated lie as they are instructed to do by Al Queda and the ACLU. Our Arabs allies are also used to torture since they are well experieced at it. Those people don't bother with lap dances.

Arabs don't come from Afghanistan.

The US doesn't abduct Moslems. The US abducts either people who happen to be Muslim who are engaged in terrorist activites or who are suspected of such. The US does not desecrate The Koran. We have in the very recent past abused a political manual used by an international NGO that uses and advocates terror to achieve world domination.